⛧ First Church of Hypocrisy, Blasphemy, and Self-Righteousness ⛧

Original Facebook post: Image of a tweet reading "Dostoyevsky kinda ate with "your worst sin is that you have destroyed and betrayed yourself for nothing.""

Me: Ate what?

Them: “he ate” = “he did a great job, excelled, dominated”

Me: Uh, no, "he ate" means he had food he chewed up and swallowed. LOL did you fail preschool?

Them: lol have you never heard of slang?

Me: Yeah but that's the stupidest slang I've ever heard of. Capitalism has us so beat down that we're using having an actual meal as slang for winning. Yet we're still not eating the rich. Pathetic.

Them: capitalism is awful, but I really can’t see why this usage is a problem

Me: "He ate" reads to me like an incomplete sentence. Also it's the stupidest slang I've ever heard. Makes "skibidi" and "whackadoo" sound cultured.

Them: it follows the grammatical pattern of “he slayed”. It’s pretty silly to have such a strong opinion about this.

Me: Yes but "He slayed" is at least a complete sentence.
And if it's silly for me to have a strong opinion on this, then you're being just as silly arguing with me about it.

Them: Alexander Antonin “he ate” is also a complete sentence

Kitty Auburn Payne: (at Them) eh, Alex can be stubborn about things. Though, more often than not he usually is correct about stuff he is being stubborn about
This is one of those things I'm inclined to just let him be silly stubborn about, as a treat

Kitty Auburn Payne: (At Me) Now you've joined the ranks of grumpy old codgers that made claims about slang from our generation 😛
I might look up the dumb crap codgers said about us... if I care about it or have energy
I'm inclined to just let you be stubborn about this--as a treat 😛

Me: (At Them) Point to me any instance where anyone has ever said "He ate." in a non-slang way, I dare you. Usually what gets said instead is "He has eaten (already)" or "He's eaten." "Ate" is used right before specifying what specific food someone ate.
Even if you did use "ate" the wrong way, it usually comes paired with "already," like "He already ate." Nobody ever just said "He ate" as a complete sentence on its own before it became this weird slang thing.

Me: (At Kitty Auburn Payne) I complain about plenty of stuff from other generations as well. The Beatles' music is horrible, most of the modern popular music is horrible but that's always been generally true; pretty much the only reason most enduring oldies music continues being played is that everyone got their music tastes from radio, and most people are too lazy to explore beyond that. Now that we have various Internet services competing for our listening, it's pretty much required to go searching around for stuff you like. The lowest common denominator people still stick with whatever's played the most on their service of choice, but there's fewer of them than in the radio days, so the music they like is correspondingly worse. But plenty of good music is still being made, if you're not too lazy or stupid to look for it. Hell, there's many times more good music now than ever before.

Back to slang, I have fewer issues with older generations' slang mostly just because all the really stupid things from those generations have already long since fallen into disuse.
Also, I only really have issue with "he ate" and "skibidi." For the most part I not only have no issue with modern gen z / alpha slang, I even use a lot of it myself. It's mainly just those two terms in particular that bug me, and the level of annoyance I get from "skibidi" is almost nonexistent, TBH. Mostly I just consider it an absurdist humor reference.

Me: (At Kitty Auburn Payne) Mostly I complain about things because I'm autistic and lots of things neurotypicals think is normal are utterly bizarre and nonsensical to me. I give the vibe of seeming like an old coot because I don't care for most things that are popular in society, but I've been like that since I was a small child. I like what I like and I complain about what I don't like or don't understand, and I've always been doing that my entire life. Just now that I happen to be 42 it's now being viewed as being due to my being old, but nope. I've literally always been this way.

About the new LOTR prequel series:

I'm all for diversity in fantasy. I'm even for diversity in Tolkein's story. I applaud diversity in media, can't get enough of it because it's new and interesting. So the diversity isn't the issue for me. The issue is that a children's book (The Hobbit) got stretched into three movies and was a burning sack of g@rbage. This new series is just a shameless, soulless cash-grab by another evil corporation.

The Hobbit was to LOTR as the Star Wars prequels were to Star Wars, and this new series is just going to be all the other new Star Wars movies all over again, where most of the griping is going to be from r@cists and s3xists griping about women and minorities existing in a story that is no longer all about cis white men, which like the Star Wars sequels is already causing people to ignore valid criticisms of the series for having been written by a bunch of suits. The things I've been hearing about the story and the effects so far don't bode well to me.

I'm putting my money on the series being hot g@rbage soup full of meaningless fan service and horrible writing just like the mess that was the Hobbit trilogy, but even worse now that Bezos's pet monkeys have their grubby little paws all over it. It's gonna be Disney's milking to d3ath of Star Wars all over again, because corporations can't just let things go.

LOTR was great, it had its three movies to tell its story and was over. It should've been allowed to remain that way. But no, they resurrected its c0rp$3 and made it shamble around for three movies in a gr0ss mockery of the original trilogy, and they're doing it again. They saw how well the diversity controversy worked at covering up the r0tt1ng flesh of the Star Wars sequels, so they're relying on that again.

Whether you're for or against diversity in fiction, focusing on that angle is just playing into their hands. This series is going to be hot g@rbage baking in the California sun, but people are still gonna watch it and make Bezos billions of more dollars because they didn't learn their lesson from the absolute clvsterfvck that was the Star Wars sequels. Which is just going to further encourage big evil mega-corporations to reanimate even more completed stories and make them moan and shuffle around while parts fall off of them.

PS = I'm also astonished they're doing the same thing to Game of Thrones after that series caught fire and crashed into a boiling lake of rotting human corpse juice.

PPS = I couldn't be arsed to undo the stupid censorship I had to use to get around Facebook's miles-high tower of bullshit they don't like.

The so-called museums that display this grotesque, disrespectful, vile shit should all be shut down, and the act of displaying human remains in this fashion needs to be made illegal. I can't believe it's 2022 and we're still doing this Barnum and Bailey freak show kind of stuff, basically taxidermying human remains for entertainment and profit. These bodies belong in a grave or being used to help doctors learn how to operate, not being put up on display for the unwashed masses to gawk at like the freak shows of old.

Okay, so. Remember "The Wizard of Oz"? Seen that movie? Of course you have. Now I want you to remember that the titular Wizard (of Oz) sent a young girl, a talking scarecrow, a talking tin man, and a cowardly talking lion to go kill the wicked witch of the west and bring back a trophy. That's messed up, right? Of course it is. And they do it, and it's traumatic AF.

Now that you're thinking about that whole ridiculous situation, I want you to know two things:

First, in the books, Oz was a real place, Dorothy really went there for real in the flesh, it wasn't in any way a dream. So within the context of the story, a real flesh-and-blood adult man sent a real-life young girl and her three friends to murder his dangerous, powerful, evil rival and bring back a trophy. Not a dream, so it's even more messed up than if it had been a dream. Not the nonsense of a dream, but an actual sociopath weaponizing a minor.

Secondly, and this is the most important part: in the book that this happened in, Dorothy was not sixteen. She was SIX. Yes, Dorothy in the first book was a mere SIX years old. An adult man... (inhales) sent a LITERAL CHILD -- a KINDERGARTENER no less... with a straw man, a tin man, and a cowardly lion... to go murder a powerful evil witch... and bring back a trophy. So in addition to being a sociopath, the Wizard is now also the multiverse's biggest coward ever. And in fact... is there a word stronger than "sociopath" to describe the monstrous act of weaponizing a KINDERGARTEN-AGE GIRL against a person who has already attempted to murder said little girl on several occasions in the story... AFTER SHE WENT TO HIM FOR HELP WITH SAID MURDEROUS WITCH. Help that he REFUSED TO GIVE HER.

And yes, he was just an ordinary man and not actually a wizard, making him a liar to boot. And yes, an ordinary human man versus a powerful evil witch is not a fair fight. But the Wizard was still an adult man who wielded power over the people of the Emerald City and possibly much more of Oz. And he was an inventor. He could have used his power to gather an army to storm the witch's castle, or even send the Oz version of Seal Team Six in against her and her forces, but no, instead he sent Seal Team Six-Year-Old.

He could've invented war balloons to attack the witch, in addition to armies. But no, i'M tHe Wizard, i'M gONnA thROW A SIX YeaR olD liTTlE GIRL at an ANCIeNt AND POWErFuL eviL WiTCh AnD hope For The bEsT.

No bloody wonder he was trying to escape in his balloon: he fully expected they'd fail, and the Wicked Witch would announce to the world that the Great and Powerful Wizard of Oz responded to a small child's call for help by saying "YOU kill her, little girl; I'm much too busy being the worst human being ever born!" right before murdering half the population of Oz with her fancy new magical shoes.

It's like in Pokemon, that scene where someone summarized it by saying "Ash threw a rat at a god. And won." The Wizard threw a toddler at a powerfully magical war criminal, and won. Only difference is, Ash expected to win and the Wizard didn't. And Dorothy only won because the witch was deathly allergic to water. (Or more realistically some cleaning agent added to the bucket of water.)

Knowing all this, is there anyone in fiction more loathsome and detestable than the Wizard of Oz?

Oh yes, and my asshole upstairs neighbor was doing this new thing earlier where he was for five minutes or so making a sound I can best describe as either he made a string of anal beads for himself out of seventeen old bowling balls and decided to have himself and a friend shake this daisy chain of bowling balls from either end... or he was down on his knees hitting the floor with his fists very rapidly like an angry toddler. Wish he would stop blaming his hallucinations on me or kill himself.

Either way he was doing it, I've been waiting since 2019 for Satan, or Lucifer, or someone else to fucking kill this guy. Satan, I have a few suggestions for the best methods:

• A kind of testicular cancer that quietly grows with no signs until one day he notices his balls look like he got both gangrene and flesh eating bacteria munching away on them, by which point the cancer has already spread to every part of his body and he has maybe a week to live because this cancer is immune to chemotherapy and is so rare they name it after him. He's also so weak he can't get out of bed the whole week, spending his last days in the hospital.


• Vomiting up fecal matter (A real disease!) until finally dying from it.


• Slips in the shower, landing head-first in the open toilet bowl that's full of shit he forgot to flush earlier, and drowns in his own bowel movement.


• Wins an all-expenses paid vacation to Australia. While he's on his free vacation, he takes a helicopter ride. The pilot punches him so hard in the face that he's dazed, the guy strips him of all his clothing, and tosses him out into a clump of gympie-gympie bushes and the asshole neighbor guy ends up in so much pain he begs for death, and then dies of a heart attack brought on by the stress and pain, a full 12 hours after falling from the helicopter.


• On one of the days he goes driving in that car of his I swear is made of a tin can, he gets T-boned by a semi truck and whoops! He forgot his seatbelt, so the cops need over two hours to find all the pieces of his miserable corpse.


• Gets in his car, has diarrhea so bad it kills him somehow. They find him absolutely reeking like the result of someone feeding Taco Bell to an infant.

However it is he dies, I hope it's alone and friendless, no family to mourn him, with nobody who loves him, ignored even by hospice workers. The only attendant to his funeral being one government person acting as a witness for the state and also the grave digger. Oh and I want to know the location of the grave, and it be here in Portland so I can save up for a couple days and take an absolutely mountainous crap on his gravestone. Like, a world record breaking shit.

Ave Satanas!

Someone on a YouTube video asked what the etiquette rules of bus riding are. This is my response:

The correct way to ride the bus is to sit down, shut the fuck up, and mind your own fucking business until you get off at your stop. The only exceptions to this rule are:

1. Bus driver didn't hear the ding for your stop and is about to pass your stop, you can shout at them to remind them.

2. If the door is legitimately stuck, you can call for the driver, but I've found most people who do this are just idiots who don't know how to do the simple thing of "wait for the light on the door to turn green, then push." If you're one of those idiots, know that my opinion of you is about equal to my opinion of dog shit.

3. Telling someone who's being loud and obnoxious to shut the fuck up.

4. If you're disabled or pregnant and you need the priority seating you can ask someone who isn't disabled or pregnant to move so you can sit there.

5. If there's a crime going on (harassment, assault, smoking on the bus, public urination, etc) you can loudly tell them off and get help from the driver.

6. When you get on or off, you can briefly ask the driver simple yes/no questions like "Am I on the right bus to go downtown?" or "Is this the right stop to get to Aldi's?" If your query takes longer than 30 seconds total for you to ask and the driver to answer, you're pissing off everyone who is in a hurry, and why didn't you ask someone for directions or use Google Maps before getting on the bus?

7. If the driver is being a dick to you, you can argue with them.

Other than that, get on the bus, sit the fuck down, and shut the fuck up until you get off the bus. Don't talk to people, don't bother people, just sit there and mind your own fucking business.

So... starting from a post on Reddit about replacing gendered words with non gendered words, we got to a good long post about why landlords are parasites:

KraZwhale: how is landlord sexist?

burningonyx: Probably because lords are always men. Anyway, a better term for landlord is "parasite."

forced_metaphor: Uh Jesus. Fucking sue me for renting out a room in my house. Wtf. You don't have to live there.

burningonyx:

I'm not talking about people who sublet. I'm talking about people who buy up houses by the dozens and then drive up the property values so that poor people can no longer afford to buy houses and then extort money from those poor people and paint themselves as providing a service when what they're really doing is making it impossible for anyone other than the insanely rich to buy a house. I'm talking also about corporations that have hundreds of houses and apartment buildings, charging ridiculous amounts of money and making billions in profits by preying on the poor while doing basically nothing in exchange. Landlords also pressure banks into rejecting home loans for poor people. I could afford a $300 a month mortgage on a house, but because of my income I'd never be seriously considered for a home loan, and even if I was, the landlords have all driven the cost of the available houses up to 10 times what they should be.

Furthermore, let's look at cost versus what you get for it. Landlords would have us believe that my apartment, which is a combined kitchen/living room, a bedroom, and a single bathroom, should cost $700 or more a month to rent. That's $8400 a year... for what? A place to sleep and eat every day? If it was rent to own, I could kinda see it. But a place to eat and sleep is literally all I get for it, my landlord doesn't even fucking do maintenance. Oh, they have maintenance guys, but they don't do any actual work. I had to get my toilet seat replaced because these assholes bought the single most shittily made toilet seat in the world. A week after they replaced it, it broke again. So I just gave up because clearly they're more concerned about their 99% profit margin than in doing anything useful.

And even if they were great at maintenance, and didn't cheap out, how would that be worth $700 a month? For $700 a month I could buy a new computer every month. If I saved $8400 in a year, I could buy a car.
But think: $8400 a year, from a single apartment. This building has 20 apartments in it. That's $168,000 a year. I could buy an entire house for what these assholes make in a year by charging people for the right to exist. And these assholes own like 10 properties, just in my area alone. I know at least one of those has like 50 apartments in it. And all of these properties are actually low income apartments, so I'm paying $200 a month for this apartment, and they get a government subsidy for the rest of that $700 a month. These people are making millions of dollars every year off people who can barely afford to eat even with their rent being largely subsidized. And they're charging us the maximum amount they're allowed to charge. They could be charging less and still getting their full $700 per apartment, but they're like "Nah, we're going to charge as much as we're legally allowed to charge. So what if a difference of $20 means the difference between running out of food before the end of the month?" Hence why I call landlords parasites. Because they do nothing but suck the money and life out of us who live in poverty.

But oh, sure, go ahead and think that I give a single solitary fuck about you subletting a single room. As if that's even remotely close to the same thing.

Basically, you're not a landlord. You're a serf with delusions of grandeur.

Burningonyx:

Oh and, not only do I get nothing out of my part of the $8400 a year I make for these assholes, I can be evicted at any time for not paying rent one month. I've been living under this company's management for like 10 years. So basically, I can sink thousands of dollars into fattening up these parasitic worms over the last decade and all that pure profit I made them means nothing to them if I miss a single payment. Miss a single payment, boom, I'm out on the streets. They're making thousands of dollars from just me existing in a space they've squatted down on, and I don't even get the benefit of some flexibility if something happens to fuck up my income unexpectedly.

Don't start in about the laws around evictions. That's one parasite keeping another parasite in check. Landlords wouldn't hesitate to throw me out on my ass the day after a missed rent check if they could get away with it.

Yes, the government are also parasites. But that's a whole other rant.

So... I found this Tumblr post where the person said "Adopted siblings are still siblings you incest loving fuckwads," and this was my response:

I'm not into incest but like... If they're not related by blood, they're genetically not siblings. The dangers of inbreeding are why that taboo exists, and that's not an issue with adopted siblings, so like... what's the objection? Not trolling, I just genuinely don't understand what the objection is to adopted siblings getting it on with each other. Like, legitimately baffled.

In an attempt to understand, I looked in the notes, and while I was there, I saw someone try to claim that shipping adopted siblings (or just not being bothered by such an obviously harmless thing as that) is somehow disrespectful to adoption, that it means you think adopted siblings aren't "real" siblings. And to that I would ask those people if they think adoption somehow magically transmutes the person's DNA to match their new family, because that is the only logical way to parse that claim. Any other definition of "real" in this context would be contrary to the accepted meaning of the word "real." And assholes like that already brought us the linguistic abortion that is the conflicting definitions of "literally," so if any of you fuck up the meaning of "real" to try to justify your moral outage over something so idiotic, then so help me Satan I will donkey kick you in the fucking teeth.

Seriously, nobody is trying to invalidate the bonds possible with the found family of adoption. But if two or more of-age adopted siblings are not related by blood, then there is no reasonable or logical reason why they can't hook up if they want to. Pretending otherwise is proving yourself to be a fool.

(There's also no logical reason why related siblings of the same sex can't hook up if they choose to, either. Two people with the same kind of genitals can't make babies with each other even if they wanted to, and since prevention of inbreeding is the reason for that taboo, then it makes no sense at all to apply the taboo to people who can't even break the only reason the taboo was made.)

I mean really, this whole argument of people like the op is one of the many bullshit arguments where people are getting all bent out of shape over something completely ridiculous because they don't know how the fuck to mind their own goddamned business, nor do they want to accept the fact that their being grossed out by something is not, in fact, an actual, logical argument against it. It is, in fact, the same kind of bullshit argument homophobes use to try to outlaw homosexuality, that transphobes use to oppress trans people. It's just a variation of the "I think it's icky and therefore it shouldn't exist" argument.

If such an argument had any validity, we would have to accept homosexuality as illegal and not do it. Trans people would have to not exist. If it had any validity, I could end veganism by saying I find vegans disgusting. Or vegans could force their bullshit diet on the rest of us by making the same argument. I don't pretend like my disgust with Miracle Whip gives me the moral authority to force others to stop eating it, so maybe use your brain and mind your own fucking business.

So go ahead, be disgusted at the shipping of adopted siblings if you want, but stop pretending like your disgust with it automatically renders it immoral or wrong. Stop pretending you can tell people what to do if it isn't hurting anyone. And stop pretending that your reasons for being disgusted by it are anything other than purely emotional and therefore entirely illogical.

PS: I no longer interact with people who argue with me on Tumblr. There's no point, nobody on this hell site knows how to listen or change their minds about anything. Also, it's just exhausting. Consider this whole post me yelling into the void.

However, to give you ass clowns one less excuse to ignore my note that responding to me is a pointless waste of your time, I will head off a couple possible arguments:

"You must be a troll who is actually an incest shipper lying about not being an incest shipper" / "You must be hot for a sibling of yours."

And

"You must be an only child."

No, I'm genuinely none of those. I no more see the appeal of incest shipping than I agree with the people opposed to it. Just like somebody can defend gay or trans people without being either of those things.

As to siblings, I have one sibling, a younger sister. We detest each other. I never liked her from the start, and she was a screaming hell beast who never fucking shut up. Literally, she used to scream nonstop for half the fucking day for no good reason, and I'm autistic, so the noise kept pushing me into meltdowns. I genuinely wish she'd never been born, and I will dance a fucking celebratory jig if I manage to outlive her. I legitimately hope she dies in a car wreck or drug overdose or some shit. So the very thought of thinking of her in a sexual way makes me want to gouge out my eyes with a paperclip and slit my own throat.

So why defend incest shippers? Because unlike you shit-sucking dick monkeys, I actual can recognize that other people don't think like I do, and don't like the same shit I do. In fact, being autistic, I couldn't fucking ignore those facts if I wanted to, because from my perspective, all you non autistic people are a bunch of utterly baffling aliens. Fully ninety percent of the shit you lot do either makes no fucking sense, is fucking evil to me, or both. Compared to shit like it being socially acceptable and even quite common to mutilate the genitals of infants for no good reason, when doing so ought to be a heinous crime alongside child molestation, people being turned on by consensual incest seems perfectly reasonable to me, even though it isn't my jam.

An application of Big Data I would support: using a database of the faces of people who are maskless covid deniers to reroute them from the hospitals when they catch covid into empty warehouses that get locked from the outside when full, so the resources of our hospitals and the valuable time of the doctors and nurses can go to people who actually deserve to be saved. Anyone in the warehouses who survives long enough for the outbreak to be contained can get treatment at that time. Anyone who criticizes this policy will be told "TheY Should have FoLLOwEd THe LaW!"

While we're at it, whenever people have church gatherings in violation of social distancing and mask rules, just lock them in there and barricade the windows. They can come out again when they've all been found to not have the covid.